tricate herself from an embarrassing situation by means of quibbles. With such tactics we were only too familiar." 51 An official Austrian communiqué announced that "a spirit of insincerity pervades the whole of this reply" 52 and the Austrian Foreign Office, under date of July 27th, made detailed observations upon the terms of the Servian reply,53 with a view to substantiating these charges, observations which drew from the Italian Minister for Foreign Affairs in conversation with the British Ambassador the remark that he considered many points made therein "quite childish." 54 Inasmuch as the Servian reply was speedily overtaken and over-shadowed by other and more important questions which arose in the course of the negotiations, it is not necessary to examine the reply and the Austrian comments in detail. It will be sufficient to call attention to the four points which alone appear to have given rise to any difficulty in the discussions which took place between the Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Austrian Ambassador at St. Petersburg, 55

Austria's first demand was for the suppression of all anti-Austrian publications. In reply to this the Servian Government pledged itself to amend the press law at the next session of the Skuptchina, so as to make anti-Austrian publications severely punishable, and to amend the Servian Constitution "at the approaching revision of the Constitu

51 Austrian Red Book, No. 41, July 28, 1914, Count Berchtold to Austrian Ambassador at London.

52 French Yellow Book, No. 75, July 28, 1914, SUPPLEMENT, April, 1915, p. 212. The personal views of the Austrian and German Ambassadors at Paris as reported by the French Foreign Office (Russian Orange Book, No. 27, July 26th, Russian Chargé d'Affaires at Paris to Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs, and French Yellow Book, No. 57, July 26, 1914, note for the Minister) do not appear to be entitled to any particular weight, inasmuch as the Ambassadors had at that time apparently not seen the text of the Servian reply.

53 Austrian Red Book, No. 34, July 27th, Count Berchtold to the Austro-Hungarian Ambassadors in Berlin, London, Rome, Paris and St. Petersburg. See also German White Book, SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, pp. 386–393.

54 British White Paper, No. 64, July 28, 1914, Sir R. Rodd to Sir Edward Grey, SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, p. 304.

55 Russian Orange Book, No. 25, July 26, 1914, Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs, to Russian Ambassador at Vienna, SUPPLEMENT, Jan. 1915, p. 20; Austrian Red Book, No. 31, July 27, 1914, Count Szapary, Austrian Ambassador at St. Petersburgh, to Count Berchtold.

tion" 56 so as to provide for the confiscation of offending publications. The Austrian Government, in commenting on this reply, took the position that Austria had sought to be sure that Servian press attacks would cease in the future, whereas Servia only offered "to make certain laws that may lead to the above result." 57 It is submitted, however, that although Austria was in a sense correct in her contention that she was not interested in the internal processes whereby Servia complied with her demands, but only in actual compliance, nevertheless it was unreasonable for her in a matter of this character to call upon Servia to abandon the ordinary processes of civilized government in order to make instant compliance with Austria's very extreme demands. If Austria feared that the ordinary processes of constitutional government would take too much time, doubtless an agreement could have been had that these processes should be accelerated in the particular case. It is submitted that the Servian reply on this point was reasonable and substantially responsive to the Austrian demand.

Austria's fourth demand was for the removal from both the military and civil service of Servia of "all officers and functionaries guilty of propaganda against the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, whose names and deeds the Austro-Hungarian Government reserves to itself the right to communicate to the Royal Government." 58 The Servian reply stipulates that such officers only shall be removed who are proved "by legal investigation" to have "implicated themselves in acts directed against the territorial integrity of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy."9 Austria observes that this calls for conviction after a legal trial for "an antiAustrian propaganda which in Servia is not usually punishable by law," and therefore is unsatisfactory. It would seem unreasonable for Austria to require the dismissal of all Servian officials who might subsequently be named by Austria without furnishing Servia any proof of the offense which they were alleged to have committed, or permitting any investigation on her part. On the other hand, if Servia by her reply intended to

56 British White Paper, No. 39, Reply of Servian Government to Austro-Hungarian note, SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, pp. 283-287; Austrian Red Book, No. 34.

57 German White Paper, SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, 389.

58 British White Paper, No. 4, SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, p. 256.

59 SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, p. 1914, p. 390.

limit compliance to a dismissal of officers convicted of crimes in the ordinary courts, it is easy to see that this might not meet the difficulty at which Austria aimed. But the difference, it is submitted, was quite susceptible of explanation and adjustment, granting a reasonable desire for adjustment on both sides.

Servia's reply to Austria's demand No. 5, was as follows:

5. The Royal Servian Government must confess that it is not quite. clear as to the sense and scope of the desire of the Austro-Hungarian Government to the effect that the Royal Servian Government bind itself to allow the co-operation within its territory of representatives of the Austro-Hungarian Government, but it nevertheless declares itself willing to permit such co-operation as might be in conformity with international law and criminal procedure, as well as with friendly neighborly relations.60

With reference to this point the Austrian Government observes:

61

International law has as little to do with this question as criminal procedure. The question is purely one of national policing, to be solved by special agreement. Servia's statement is, therefore, incomprehensible and, on account of its vague form, would give rise to insurmountable difficulties if an endeavor were made to arrange the agreement. However, under date of July 25th, Count Berchtold instructed the Austrian Ambassador in St. Petersburg to make confidential explanations to the Russian Government in regard to the meaning of Austrian demand No. 5, to the effect that it did not contemplate any "impairment of the sovereignty of Servia." Count Berchtold adds, "The 'collaboration' mentioned in clause 5 refers to the creation in Belgrade of a secret bureau de sureté which would work like the similar Russian institution in Paris and would coöperate with the Servian police and administration." 62 Servia had not refused the Austrian demand on this point. Each government was claiming not to understand the precise meaning of the other, and Austria stood ready to explain her demand to Russia. This would seem, therefore, to be a case for mutual explanations before a punitive expedition was resorted to.

60 SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, pp. 390, 391. It will be remembered that the coöperation demanded was "in the suppression of the subversive movement directed against the territorial integrity of the monarchy."

61 Ibid., p. 391.

62 Austrian Red Book, No. 27, Count Berchtold to Count Szapary in St. Petersburg, July 25, 1914.

The difficulty with respect to Austria's sixth demand was of a similar character. The Servian reply reads:

6. The Royal Government naturally holds itself bound to institute an investigation against all such persons as were concerned in the plot of June 15th-28th, or are supposed to have been concerned in it, and are on Servian soil. As to the co-operation of special delegates of the Austro-Hungarian Government in this investigation, the Servian Government cannot accept such co-operation, since this would be a violation of the laws and criminal procedure. However, in individual cases, information as to the progress of the investigation might be given the Austro-Hungarian delegates.63

As to this the Austrian Government comments that the Austrian demand was for participation on the part of Austrian representatives in the preliminary investigation, not the trial "(recherche in contradistinction to enquête judicaire);" and that "if the Servian Government misunderstands us it does so purposely, since the difference between enquête judicaire and the simple recherches must certainly be plain to it.” Here again it would seem that irrespective of whether the Servian misunderstanding was real or assumed, Austria, if she really desired a peaceful solution, could have afforded to clear the point up by supplementary explanations before drawing the sword. Of course the real truth of the matter was, as appears over and over in the correspondence, that the Austrian Government and people, rightly or wrongly, thoroughly distrusted the Servian Government and people-to put it mildly; and therefore deemed themselves justified in refusing to deal with them upon the basis upon which one self-respecting nation deals with another, no matter how small or weak. As Count Mensdorff, the Austrian Ambassador to London, admitted, "on paper the Servian reply might seem to be satisfactory;" but he contended "the Servians had refused the one thing-the coöperation of Austrian officials and police-which would be a real guarantee that in practice the Servians would not carry on their subversive compaign against Austria.64

The Servian reply concludes as follows:

If the Imperial and Royal Government are not satisfied with this reply, the Servian Government, considering that it is not to the common 63 SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, p. 391.

64 British White Paper, No. 48, July 27, Sir Edward Grey to Sir M. de Bunsen, SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, p. 292 at 294.

interest to precipitate the solution of this question, are ready, as always, to accept a pacific understanding, either by referring this question to the decision of the International Tribunal of The Hague, or to the great Powers which took part in the drawing up of the declaration made by the Servian Government on the 18th (31st) March, 1909.65

It is easy to understand the reasons which rendered Austria unwilling to submit her demands, which were so largely political in character, to The Hague Tribunal. This was not pressed in any quarter. But Servia's other suggestion, that her alleged breach of an engagement which had been framed by the great Powers, be submitted to these same Powers for consideration, was destined to loom large in the remainder of the negotiations.66

SIR EDWARD GREY'S ATTEMPTS AT MEDIATION. AUSTRIA DECLARES WAR ON SERVIA

The Servian reply was handed to the Austrian Minister at Belgrade at six o'clock July 25th, at the expiration of the time limit. The reply was pronounced unsatisfactory by the Austrian Minister, who left Belgrade at six-thirty.67 The Servian Government, which had ordered mobilization at three o'clock the afternoon of the 25th,68 at once transferred itself from Belgrade to Nish, where the Skuptchina was summoned to meet on Monday the 27th.69 Austria also proceeded to make military preparations,70 and the German Secretary of State spoke of her intention "to give the Servians a lesson," 71 although it was, in his opinion, 65 British White Paper, No. 39, SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, p. 283 at 287.

66 Compare the advice given to the Servian Minister at Paris by M. BienvenuMartin, Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs of France, July 24, 1914, "above all, to attempt to escape from the direct grip of Austria by declaring herself ready to submit to the arbitration of Europe." (French Yellow Book, No. 26, Supplement, April, 1915, p. 172. See supra, p. 420, note 41.)

67 British White Paper, No. 23, July 25th, Mr. Crackanthorpe to Sir Edward Grey, SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, p. 274.

68 French Yellow Book, No. 50, SUPPLEMENT, April, 1915, p. 191; Austrian Red Book, Nos. 29, 30, 39, 40.

69 British White Paper, No. 23, Supplement, Oct. 1914, p. 274; French Yellow Book, No. 50, SUPPLEMENT, April, 1915, p. 191.

70 French Yellow Book, No. 51, SUPPLEMENT, April, 1915, p. 193.

71 British White Paper, No. 18, July 25, 1914, Sir H. Rumbold to Sir Edward Grey, SUPPLEMENT, Oct. 1914, p. 271.